Pdf 1005.43 K
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Biology & Fisheries Zoology Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. ISSN 1110 – 6131 Vol. 23(4): 503 – 519 (2019) www.ejabf.journals.ekb.eg New records, conservation status and pectoral fin description of eight shark species in the Egyptian Mediterranean waters. Walaa M. Shaban* and Mohamed A. M. El-Tabakh Zoology Department, Marine Biology and Fish Sciences section, Faculty of Science, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt *Corresponding author: [email protected] ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article History: For a taxonomical purpose, the present study described and analyzed the Received: Oct. 12, 2019 pectoral fin shape and measurements of shark specimens, collected from the Accepted: Nov. 6, 2019 Egyptian Mediterranean Sea waters at Alexandria, during the period from Online: Nov. 11, 2019 May 2017 to June 2018. Morphology and morphometric fin characters were _______________ used taxonomically to differentiate between shark species via photo program analysis. After confirming the identification of sharks, a list of shark species Keywords: in the Egyptian Mediterranean waters was given with emphasize on new Shark record species as well as the conservation status of each species. Pectoral fin Results showed that the collected specimens belong to eight species Morphometric analysis from different six families belonging to four orders. Species-list of sharks in New Record this study including; Heptranchias perlo, Hexanchus griseus, Squalus Conservation status megalops, Centrophorus uyato, Oxynotus centrina, Squatina squatina, Mediterranean Sea Isurus oxyrinchus and Isurus paucus. By comparing the present findings Egypt with the previous studies, three shark species out of these eight species were considered as new records in the Egyptian Mediterranean waters. These new records are Heptranchias perlo, Squalus megalops and Isurus paucus. According as the global assessment of the IUCN (2018) red list, Heptranchias perlo and Hexanchus griseus are reported as near threatened species; while Oxynotus centrina considered as vulnerable species. Isurus oxyrinchus and Isurus paucus mentioned as endangered species. However, Squatina squatina is critically endangered. On the other hand, data was insufficient to state the situation of Squalus megalops and Centrophorus uyato. The morphological aspects of pectoral fins, for these eight shark species, were greatly varied in shape that proved the potential capability to use this new technique as an important identification and classification tool. The statistical analysis of morphometric ratios also supports this proposition and shows a significant variance between investigated species. Our study attempted to add more update information on shark pectoral fin morphological and dimensional scaling. INTRODUCTION The Mediterranean Sea is a semi-enclosed marine area with generally narrow continental shelf. It is the most famous intercontinental sea, mediate the old three continents; Europe, Asia and Africa (about 6°W and 36°E Long. and Lat. 30° to 46°N), and covers an average of approximately 2.5 million square kilometers (UNEP, 504 Walaa M. Shaban and Mohamed A. M. El-Tabakh 1989). The Egyptian Mediterranean Sea coast attained about 1100 km. It extends from El-Salloum in the West to El-Arish in the East (Mehanna et al., 2005) Sharks and their relatives (the batoids and chimaeras) comprise the Chondrichthyes fish, a group of more than 1100 species, of which more than 400 were sharks (Compagno, 2005). Due to their high diversity and their inconvenient identification, shark fins were intensively used by many authors to distinguish between different shark species in many marine locations (Consoli et al., 2004; Dragicevic et al., 2009; Dragicevic et al., 2010; Marouani et al. 2012; Reynaud & capapé 2014; Yığın et al., 2016; Becerril-García et al., 2017). Recently at the local level, Azab et al. (2019) described shark dorsal fin (and analyzed dorsal fin morphometric data) for some shark species in Egyptian Mediterranean waters. They give proof for the potential capability of this method (using the morphological aspects of shark’s dorsal fin) in shark species identification, where their statistical analysis of morphometric ratios showed significant variances between investigated species. Although the shark's pectoral fin considered a key feature in taxonomy, their position to the dorsal fin play important role in the separation and classification between near morphologically identical species (FAO, 2005), it has never been used in Egyptian Mediterranean waters. Moreover, at both local and global levels, the increasing consumption of shark products, along with the shark’s fishing vulnerabilities, led to the decrease in certain shark populations (Chuang et al., 2016). In addition, IUCN (2018) listed the species in this study as vulnerable, endangered and critically endangered species. There was insufficient data to state the situation of Squalus megalops and Centrophorus uyato in wild. The present study aimed to describe the pectoral fin shape and measurements for Egyptian Mediterranean shark species to answer the following question: Does the pectoral fin exhibits enough differences that qualify it to be taxonomic characteristics used in identification and classification of shark species belonging to orders Hexanchiformes, Squaliformes, Squatiniformes and Lamniformes in the given area? By answering that question, it will be easy to update the information about shark species recorded in the Egyptian Mediterranean waters and spot on their conservation status. MATERIALS AND METHODS Samples collection Alexandria is located about 223 Km North of Cairo and lies at 31°12'56.3"N & 29°57'18.97"E. Four Fish land markets (El-Max, Anfushi, Abu-Qir and Al-Maadia) were the main sites for shark specimen collection at the shoreline of Alexandria (Figure 1). A total of 43 specimens of sharks belong to 8 species (7 of Heptranchias perlo, 5 of Hexanchus griseus, 10 of Squalus megalops, 8 of Centrophorus uyato, one of Oxynotus centrina, 8 of Squatina squatina, 2 of Isurus oxyrinchus and 2 of Isurus paucus) were seasonally collected from the commercial catch of Mediterranean Sea at land fish markets in Alexandria (Figure 1); during the period from May 2017 to June 2018. Shark specimens were freshly examined. Many photos had been captured using Nikon D3200 Camera Kit with 18.55mm lens for each shark pectoral fins to be processed by Image J V1.46r software to calculate the morphometric measures. Each morphometric feature for the pectoral fins has been measured three times in three separate sessions and the average has been calculated to eliminate the error as could New records and pectoral fin description of eight shark species in the Egyptian Mediterranean 505 as possible. Each pectoral fin belonging to one of the investigated species has been fully described with highlighting their diagnostic feature. Some sharks were preserved in 10% formalin solution and transported to laboratory of Marine Biology, Zoology Department, Faculty of Science, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt for latter examinations. In the laboratory, sharks were identified according to FAO (2005) and the following studies were carried out. Fig. 1: A map showing Alexandria coast of Egyptian Mediterranean Sea Pectoral fin measurements: To study morphometric features of the pectoral fin in sharks, the following measurements (Figure 2) were recorded for it according to Marshall & Barone (2016): 1. Free rear tip (P. A): The distance between fin insertions to the end of the free rear tip. 2. Fin base (P. B): The distance between fin origin to the fin insertion; i.e. the length of the pectoral fin base. 3. Anterior margin (P. E): The distance between the pectoral fin origin and the fin tip. 4. Total fin width (P. F): The distance between anterior ends of fin base to the end of the free rear tip. 5. Upper posterior margin (P. H1): The distance between the tip of the fin and the deepest point of the concave curve of the posterior margin. 6. Lower posterior margin (P. H2): The distance between the deepest points of the concave curve of the posterior margin to the end of the free rear tip. 7. Posterior margin (P. I): The distance between the fin tip to the posterior tip of the free rear tip. 8. Fin angle (P. Jº): The angle between the direct fin height (K) and the he mid-fin base (1⁄2 B). 9. Fin height (direct) (P. K): Distance from the mid-fin base (B) to the tip of the fin. 10. Fin height (absolute) (P. L): Perpendicular distance from the fin baseline (B) to the tip of the fin. 11. Anterior margin height (P. Ah): The greatest distance (perpendicular) between line E and the anterior margin of the fin, anterior to line E. 12. Posterior margin depth (P. Bh): The greatest distance (perpendicular) between line I and the posterior margin of the fin, anterior to line I. 506 Walaa M. Shaban and Mohamed A. M. El-Tabakh 13. Upper posterior margin convex depth (P. Dh): The greatest distance (perpendicular) between the line H and the posterior margin of the fin, posterior to line H. 14. Upper posterior margin concave depth (P. Eh): The greatest distance (perpendicular) between the line H and the posterior margin of the fin, anterior to line H. Data analysis Analysis of variance (ANOVA) using Fisher LSD method to refuse the null hypnosis and confirm the presence of significant variance between different pectoral fins morphometric measurements. The analysis become available using SigmaPlot V12.5 and MiniTab V18.1 software. Tow way cluster (Heat map) constructed using Euclidean (Pythagorean) distance measure with Ward’s group linkage method, the analysis applied using Pc- Ord V5.0 software. Principal components analysis (PCA) become available using correlation cross-products matrix. While, the score of the ratios calculated using distance-based biplot in Pc-Ord V5.0 software. Fig. 2: Diagrammatic representation of morphometric measurements of pectoral fins of sharks RESULTS Classification and conservation status: Results of Table (1) showed that the shark specimens collected from the Egyptian Mediterranean waters at Alexandria belong to eight species from different six families belonging to four orders.